Wil Reichert gmail.com> writes:
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Mike Ramsey
> comcast.net> wrote:
> > Jaime sanchez gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >>
[snip]
>
> I seriously doubt Phoronix has anything against btrfs, most likely
> quite the opposite.
I gave two possibilities,
1. Hatchet jo
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Mike Ramsey wrote:
> Jaime sanchez gmail.com> writes:
>
>>
>> They are using 2.6.29.4 kernel, it isn't a bit old??
>>
>> I think that kernel doesn't have the last btrfs updates, and that it
>> is a very bad work and benchmarks results from phoronix part. If u are
Stephan von Krawczynski ithnet.com> writes:
[snip]
>
> Can someone explain to a quite naive person like me why one should be
> interested in SSDs that perform worse than Intel? Why shouldn't I just buy the
> best-performing product? This is a moving market, and it is obvious that the
> bad perfo
Jaime sanchez gmail.com> writes:
>
> They are using 2.6.29.4 kernel, it isn't a bit old??
>
> I think that kernel doesn't have the last btrfs updates, and that it
> is a very bad work and benchmarks results from phoronix part. If u are
> benchmarking an experimental file system benchmark it
Miguel F Mascarenhas Sousa Filipe gmail.com> writes:
[snip]
>
> You mean ZFS, but I think everybody who read this "self-corrected" your typo.
Yes, I mean ZFS. ZFS used to be known as the Zettapoint File System.
I guess my subconsciousness couldn't let go of the "point".
[snip]
>
> File sy
My fault then, i thought it was a recent article (the discussion
appeared recently on the list) , i read it all except the date. I
didn't see it was from 29 may. I apologize.
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:44 PM, nightrow wrote:
> If you look here : http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page in t
If you look here : http://btrfs.wiki.kernel.org/index.php/Main_Page in
the benchmarking section, you will notice that the test was made more
than one month ago.
I also mentionned, as said by chris on phoronix phorums, that kernel
starting from 2.6.30 should be faster.
I think we should expect
They are using 2.6.29.4 kernel, it isn't a bit old??
I think that kernel doesn't have the last btrfs updates, and that it
is a very bad work and benchmarks results from phoronix part. If u are
benchmarking an experimental filesystem benchmark it with the lastest
updaets ¿? it doesn't have sense.
-
They are using 2.6.29.4 kernel, it isn't a bit old??
I think that kernel doesn't have the last btrfs updates, and that it
is a very bad work and benchmarks results from phoronix part. If u are
benchmarking an experimental filesystem benchmark it with the lastest
updaets ¿? it doesn't have sens
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 06:19:35PM +0200, Stephan von Krawczynski wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:41:23 -0400
> Chris Mason wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:51:41AM +, Mike Ramsey wrote:
> > > I ran across this article "Testing Out The SSD Mode In Btrfs".
> > > http://www.phoronix.com
On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 10:41:23 -0400
Chris Mason wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:51:41AM +, Mike Ramsey wrote:
> > I ran across this article "Testing Out The SSD Mode In Btrfs".
> > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_ssd_mode&num=1
> >
> > At first I was disappointed
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 04:53:59PM +0200, Sander wrote:
> Chris Mason wrote (ao):
> > Jens Axboe tried to reproduce the phoronix results on his ocz drive,
> > and generally found that each run was slower than the last regardless
> > of which mount options were used. This isn't entirely surprising,
Chris Mason wrote (ao):
> Jens Axboe tried to reproduce the phoronix results on his ocz drive,
> and generally found that each run was slower than the last regardless
> of which mount options were used. This isn't entirely surprising, but
> it did make it very difficult to nail down good or bad per
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:51:41AM +, Mike Ramsey wrote:
> I ran across this article "Testing Out The SSD Mode In Btrfs".
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_ssd_mode&num=1
>
> At first I was disappointed. It gave a very disappointing set of benchmarks.
> However, a cl
On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:51 AM, Mike Ramsey wrote:
> I ran across this article "Testing Out The SSD Mode In Btrfs".
> http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=btrfs_ssd_mode&num=1
>
> At first I was disappointed. It gave a very disappointing set of benchmarks.
> However, a close reading
Hi there,
On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 4:53 PM, Mike Ramsey wrote:
>
> I was looking at file systems for Linux, Ubuntu in particular. I really like
> Sun's ZPF. ZPF's copy-on-write transaction model strikes me as the correct
> way to go. But ZPF lacks a GNU General Public License which blocks ZPF's
16 matches
Mail list logo
